If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

anywho, i am by no means a zealot of any camp...couldn't care less actually what OS/source/company, so long as i get my shits and giggles...all i meant by Bill Gates adopting the attitude of open-source, was that he (and his company) should start doing what the Linux developers have already begun: update the system *before* the initial boot sequence i.e. before the user can have a chance at running amok on the web, clicking every shiny button/flashing icon.

now, i know that the files will have to be downloaded *somewhere* on the hard disk -- even a temp directory -- but these same files will of course be checked (vs checksum/md5?) before being allowed to execute, then removed from the system (after rebooting perhaps, this is Windows we're talking about)...and i think the uber-firewall idea is still a great one, all but one port closed, connecting to one of several predefined _secure_ servers...remember, the system is *still* not fully booted, so even if something could sneak its way onto the system it would be deleted before the first logon, along with all files not part of the initial install...

- Gore: Just curious, but what windows application can only be run on Windows 98 and 2000?

- Secondly, I think having *nix on your cousins box could be a good thing for many reasons (as well the bad reasons, but) for instance you can fix any mistake and download any update/patch/etc remotely by connecting via SSH or whatever. A window's machine you still could be able to do it remotely (perhaps a trojan or something ) but *nix is less difficult to deal with remotely. A few commands here or there..

- Pooh also makes quite some sense and here's what I wanna add: Take for an example an infant young child. The child doesn't know anything, doesn't know how to talk or walk, and has to learn on his own. He will only learn in the environment he is in and surrounded by. When we are young, we are taught to think, believe, learn, talk, and walk the WAY WE ARE TAUGHT. What's my point? If someone never heard of computers, windows, microsoft, *nix, etc and you show them a computer installed with say SuSe on it. You teach them how to work it, how to operate it, and the whole thing. They learn (gradually AND over time) and become very much accustomed to the system. There ya go..

Now, my take on it is this: Windows/Microsoft is shoved into the public's face so much and because of it's simplicity and ease of use, people get easily accustomed to it and learn how to work it. If the roles were reversed, they would understand and work *nix in similiar fashion. However, the debate of which is easier to use is there (and I'm sure many of you will say Windows) and that's a whole other topic.

- Secondly, I think having *nix on your cousins box could be a good thing for many reasons (as well the bad reasons, but) for instance you can fix any mistake and download any update/patch/etc remotely by connecting via SSH or whatever. A window's machine you still could be able to do it remotely (perhaps a trojan or something ) but *nix is less difficult to deal with remotely. A few commands here or there..

On that note Windows XP has Remote Assistance which lets someone "invite" someone to remotely access and fix / patch their system. It can be left open indefinitely or be given a short duration so that the hole into the network is not left open any longer than necessary. But, it does offer a means for someone to connect remotely to administer and maintain the system if you have friends or family that run XP.

Yeah, I've heard/read about that. Seem's kinda irky if ya ask me, and it sounds like it can be easily exploited by an outsider. It's basically an official windows trojan, IMHO. However I've heard it's GUI to remotely control the system is pretty decent.

I personally see it just like a SSH but with gui. It has encryption, password protection, IP and hostname filters, GUI control, and it isn't just a "click to connect". The computer you are connecting to has to literally "invite" you to connect back to them. The confirmation is almost identical to calling up a support desk and saying, "I need help!" and them replying "I'm on my way". If you don't ever ask them for help, they can't ever connect to you.

The Remote Desktop Web Connection is a high-encryption, Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP) 5.0 client and uses RSA Security's RC4 cipher with a key strength of 40-, 56-, or 128-bit, as determined by the computer to which it is connecting. The Remote Desktop Web Connection uses the well-known RDP TCP port (3389) to communicate to the host. Unlike some other display protocols, which send data over the network using clear text or with an easily decodable "scrambling" algorithm, Remote Desktop Web Connection's built-in encryption makes it safe to use over any network—including the Internet—as the protocol cannot be easily sniffed to discover passwords and other sensitive data.

IIRC, this comes switched on in XP Pro, (I dunno about Home). To all intents it's Terminal Services with a cuter name.....

When you try to connect to it you receive a standard Win2K/XP login unless the admin has enabled the warning box etc. If you successfully authenticate and there is another user logs on it gives you the choice to kick them or to cancel the transaction.

If you kick the logged on user then you will leave a trail in the event log. Maybe not that you kicked them but that you logged on.... assuming, of course, that logging logons is turned on.

Terminal services has proven to be fairly robust from a security standpoint if the admin understands the potential for abuse and uses the facilities M$ provided within the OS to minimize or prevent the abuse..... I've been using it for 2+ years publicly without incident though I have to admit that in the last months or more I have restricted it's use to only those who have successfully built a VPN tunnel first.....

Don\'t SYN us.... We\'ll SYN you..... \"A nation that draws too broad a difference between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards, and its fighting done by fools.\" - Thucydides

IIRC, this comes switched on in XP Pro, (I dunno about Home). To all intents it's Terminal Services with a cuter name.....

Actually- you are thinking of Remote Desktop...

Q. Is Remote Assistance the same thing as Remote Desktop?

A. No, it isn't. Remote Assistance uses Remote Desktop technology to allow an expert to provide assistance to a novice user on a computer running Windows XP. Get more information about Remote Assistance .

They are virtually the same, but Remote Desktop does not exist on XP Home. You are right that it is like Terminal Services- basically to let tech support or the HelpDesk access your system and do what they need to do. That is partially why it doesn't exist in XP Home. In XP Home you would have to use Remote Assistance and actually send the email invitation in order for someone to access your system remotely.

Q. Is Remote Desktop available on Windows XP Home Edition?

A. No, however you can upgrade from Windows XP Home Edition to Windows XP Professional to get Remote Desktop. You can use Windows XP Home Edition as the client for accessing your Windows XP Professional computer running Remote Desktop.

Ok.... I haven't played with it like that..... Is there a way to "play" with it?

Don\'t SYN us.... We\'ll SYN you..... \"A nation that draws too broad a difference between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards, and its fighting done by fools.\" - Thucydides